|
Editorial, |
||
|
||
|
|
||
|
By THE NEW MEXICAN For a far-flung part of a nation whose minimum wage remains $5.15 an hour,
In 2003, the City Council enacted a three-step “living wage” ordinance: It
began in 2004 at $8.50 an hour. It’s been $9.50 since the start of 2006, and
debates were about to begin on a raise to $10.50 that would take effect at
the beginning of next year. It was tough for many businesspeople to swallow — but in its early stages,
said The University of New Mexico’s Bureau of Business and Economic Research,
it didn’t keep The bureau will be issuing another report next month — focusing on
employment and wages since the ordinance took effect. Whether living-wage advocates are anticipating less-than-good news, or
whether businesspeople were preparing to balk strongly at $10.50, nervousness
was building up over that last dollar jump.
To the credit of city leaders, the business community and the Living Wage
Network, they talked things over — and arrived at a compromise: No $10.50
minimum next year — but yearly cost-of-living-adjusted raises starting in
January, 2009. And the living-wage ordinance no longer would apply only to
businesses with 25 or more employees; all employers in the city would pay the
This means mom-and-pop operations would be hit with demands to nearly
double their workers’ wages. We wonder how many of them were represented in the negotiations. The Santa
Fe Lodgers Association, the Chamber of Commerce and the Santa Fe Business
Alliance, representing some of the town’s smaller establishments, were in on
Thursday’s announcement of the compromise — but how many stores and cafes are
so tiny they haven’t the time or money for any representation? Could they be
faced with laying off their few employees — and
working themselves to death to keep the place going? They’ll have to find time to voice their concerns at the three public
hearings to be held on this new wage proposal. Meanwhile, city councilors
should ask themselves if there’s another number they should plug into the
ordinance: Instead of 25 being the living-wage threshold, what about 10? Or
5? The 25-employee point has been a sticky one, especially when it comes to
franchise operations: Do you count the workers at one store, all the stores
in Anyone who’s had to cope with the cost of being a Santa Fean knows that even $9.50 is nowhere near a living wage,
even if both of a family’s parents, and maybe a kid or two, are bringing home
paychecks. The businesspeople of our community have long known that; many of them pay
more than the local minimum. But how many can afford to go on rewarding their
most loyal employees with wages how far above Santa Fe’s starting pay? Judging from the support that’s been gathered for the compromise, much of
it appears to have been worked out — but that issue, too, must be aired at
the hearings. As for part-time workers, they’ve been covered so far under the
living-wage ordinance. A cautious Councilor Karen Heldmeyer
wants assurance that hasn’t changed, so she’s withholding her support until
she’s given the compromise a good read. Chances are she’ll find many points
demanding clarification; so might her colleague Patti Bushee,
who wants a closer look at the cost-of-living provisions. The rest of the
council should give it the fine-tooth-comb approach. From what has emerged so far, this proposal, and the
consensus-gathering that’s gone into it, are encouraging. |